RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW OF THE FEDERAL GRAND JURY

• NCJ Number: 60068
• Journal: Criminal Law Review Dated: (1979) Pages: 321-384
• Author(s): D K REDD
• Date Published: 1979
• Length: 64 pages
• Corporate Author: Clark Boardman Company, Ltd
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: REPRINTED FROM UTAH LAW REVIEW, N 170 (1977)

Annotation

THE CONSTITUTIONAL INTENTION AND EXECUTIVE ABUSES OF THE GRAND JURY SYSTEM ARE EXAMINED, AND PENDING CONGRESSIONAL GRAND JURY REFORM LEGISLATION IS CRITIQUED, FOLLOWED BY A SUGGESTED APPROACH FOR GRAND JURY REFORM.

Abstract

ABSENT A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT EXCISING A PROVISION OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS, THE GRAND JURY SYSTEM CANNOT BE ABOLISHED. ALTHOUGH ADOPTED INTO AMERICAN LAW PRIMARILY TO ACT AS AN INDEPENDENT BODY TO SHIELD ACCUSED PERSONS FROM UNDUE HARASSMENT BY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, THE GRAND JURY HAS ALSO BEEN USED AS A MEANS FOR DETECTING AND PUNISHING CRIME. THE CRITICISMS OF THE GRAND JURY SYSTEM MOST OFTEN RECOGNIZED BY COURTS ARE THAT THE GRAND JURY IS VULNERABLE TO PROSECUTORIAL MANIPULATION AND OFTEN NEGLECTS THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED, FOR WHOSE PRIMARY BENEFIT IT WAS INCORPORATED INTO THE BILL OF RIGHTS. COMPREHENSIVE GRAND JURY REFORM LEGISLATION IS PENDING BEFORE CONGRESS. THE LEGISLATION MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE ON THE GROUND THAT IT UNCONSTITUTIONALLY ENCROACHES UPON THE FUNCTIONING OF AN ARM OF THE JUDICIAL BRANCHES. EVEN IF FOUND CONSTITUTIONAL, HOWEVER, THE HEAVY-HANDED EMPHASIS PLACED ON WITTNESS'S RIGHTS MAY WELL IMPAIR THE LEGITIMATE INVESTIGATORY FUNCTIONS OF THE GRAND JURY AND THEREBY REDUCE ITS FUNCTION TO THAT OF A PRELIMINARY HEARING BEFORE LAYMEN RATHER THAN BEFORE A TRAINED MAGISTRATE. THE LEGISLATION WILL ALSO OPEN UP NEW PROCEDURAL CHALLENGES WHICH MAY DEFEAT THE PURPOSES OF A GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION. A BETTER APPROACH TO GRAND JURY REFORM WOULD BE FOR THE COURTS, IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR SUPERVISORY POWERS, TO POLICE GRAND JURY PRACTICES WHICH TEND TO DENIGRATE THE INSTITUTION BY NEGLECTING THE RIGHTS OF THOSE CAUGHT UP IN GRAND JURY PROCESSES. WHEN A POSITION IS PRESSED BEFORE THE COURT THAT EMPHASIZES ONLY ONE OF THE GRAND JURY'S FUCTIONS, WHETHER INQUISITIVE, ACCUSATIVE, OR PROTECTIVE, THE COURT SHOULD STRIVE TO BALANCE THE COMPETING INTEREST INVOLVED AND HARMONIZE THE FUNCTION IN QUESTION WITH THE FUNCTION IN QUESTION WITH THE OTHER INTENTIONS OF THE GRAND JURY SYSTEM. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED---RCB)